Mavericky Puig

[serghei]

He won with 6 midfielders, having the one and only Xavi and Iniesta, he had the one and only GOAT Messi.

And with all of that had around 20% of wins in KO away matches.
And lost almost 3 out of 4 ties against bully teams.

My point is: we will never replicate the quality of Pep's team, yet even that team struggled against particular type of opponents.

And today majority of CL teams play in the way which is a kryptonite to a classic Barca's style.

And since majoriry of Barca's purists want to go back to our roots and to Pep's ideas, I am asking: how on Earth will we win with baf copies of Pep's team against European direct-physical-aggressive teams from 2022 onwards?

We'll lose 1:8 in every single season.

You seem to really try to discredit Pep, but on every forum out there, that team is referred to as "Pep's Barca" for a reason. The contribution of Guardiola is the highest.

Other than that, of course, you can't be setting a goal to recreate the 2011 team playing style. That will end in disaster. The 2009 side is very similar but better than the Rijkaard you admit you like more than Pep.

2009 Barca is like 2006 Barcelona only a level above. Similar style, a bit more possession, but also with individual flair, and power + athleticism from players like Eto'o, Henry, and Yaya Toure.

 

[fergus90]

We discussed similar questions a few times in the past.
I am Rijkaard's fan and not Pep's.
Even though Pep was more dominant.
But imo, Pep killed the no9, and created a perfect one-way (possession style) and sacrificed corners, crosses, headers, physique, longshots, longballs.
Rijkaard was more all-rounder.
Pep created a team with 11 Iniestas.
If they are on form, they will trash anyone.
But if they meet some bullies in Europe of if they can't break the bus, with Pep there is no plan B in Europe.

Anyway, Pep's possession, dominant, attacking football is absolutely the best type for LEAGUE competitions.
Over 38 rounds, his teams will usually be on top.
The same is with Barca in Spain, who could have won all titles since 2009 with a bit of luck.

On the other hand, that style doesn't work in Europe, except in perfect conditions when you are miles better than everyone.

In Europe and on World cups, winners in the last 7-8 years are usually direct, lethal teams.
Germans, France, Real with crosses and Cr7, Liverpool, Bayern.

Those teams are all similar.
They are dominant, but they don't dwell on ball like Barca.
They are more direct.
They use possession, counters and crosses, unlike Barca.
They usually have a true No9, unlike Barca.
They are more physical, taller and faster than Barca.
They are more aggressive than our nice choirboys.
They have better mental strength at 0:1 or in the 90th minute where you need clutch players and bravery.

Nice guys can win over 38 rounds because there is no sudden death (knockout matches).
Less technical yet physical and aggressive teams will lose more points over 38 rounds.

So, roughly:
League championship is more about skills, technique, possession.
Champions league and world cup KO rounds are more about: boxing match, street fighting, mental strength, dirty tricks, direct football, clutch players, finding the simplest way to shoot and score (Real's crosses to Cr7 or Bayern's style, for example, where Germans often say: "you don't want to have more than 70% of possession, you are making a mistake in that case).

In that sense, theoretically, we could win La liga with 3 Puigs in midfield.
Yet, in a CL we would probably lose 7:1 to any EPL or German team.

In a CL, Barca's true style worked only in 1992, where there was only 1 team per country, where we luckily scored in the 90th minute in a round of 16, and where we won with a free kick goal from Koeman in a final.
It is hard to call that a true domination.

Rijkaard in 2006, the same.
Good football, but far from a domination.

Msn in 2015, we bypassed midfield and relied on defense and MSN magic.
Not too much in common with Pep's domination.

So, basically, our only finals with Barca/Pep's domination came when we had 6 false midfielders, Xavi-Iniesta and a GOAT Messi, in an era without too many physical teams.

So, on a European level, it is hard to say that Barca's football dominated except during the golden generation.
So, it is reasonable to ask: can that classic style win ever again in Europe?

Winning against La liga opponents is one thing.
And winning against EPL bullies, Bayern and Italians is a different world.

I was a huge fan of Rijkaard too and the Rijkaard era in general too, so don't get me wrong I can appreciate the fact that it's true we had more than one way to attack with Rijkaard. I would argue however that even in 08/09 and 09/10 we still had various degrees of pace and physicality in the side. 2009 with Henry, Eto'o, Toure and Keita especially then Ibra joined. To be honest we didn't really see Busi-Xavi-Iniesta truly week in and week out until 2010/11.

In Pep's first two seasons Xavi would regularly play with Busi and Toure/Keita and Don Andres would be LW.

We went from having the likes of Henry, Eto'o etc to Sanchez, Fabregas and Alba along with Xavi,Iniesta, Alves by the end of 2012. Pretty much a squad of 11 players who all liked the ball to feet bar Pedro and the build up got slower, the movement got less and we had zero threat from set pieces and crosses.

 

[Bobo32]

2011 was when Barcelona were the most dominant, they got better and better after releasing more of these players with "pace and physicality".
After the final in 2011 there was perhaps a bit of stagnation, and a lot of turbulence also, but until Enrique, Neymar and Rakitic arrived, they were generally moving in the direction I wanted.
With these three, they mixed it up more and more, and lost more and more of that core that Pep built. I do consider the 2015 title to be a Pyrrhus victory, owing much more to Peps earlier work, and to that style, than was credited, but still moving away from it.
In the short term there is nothing easier and "better" than taking a team like that and bring some verticality and "decisiveness" to it, but in the long term it's bad. I've seen this on multiple levels.

I also don't at all agree with the distinction between league and cup. The difference lies almost only in variance, not at all in some psychological difference.
An isolated game is always decided to a large degree by chance. These "clutch" players are just the players that happened to score.
I hope everyone here can see there has been no player more clutch than Messi, the regular football viewer thinks the opposite, since the NT games is such a small sample.

The thing about lacking a "plan B" is also very annoying, a stupid thing people used to say when Barcelona lost, but how many times didn't they turn games around by sticking to their plan?
More than any flexible team I'm pretty certain.
No national team has been dominant since Spain, and they were dominant mostly because they had the core from the same club already.

To not be completely off topic in this thread I give you this little video I found: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRZcQyw7qrU

 

[fergus90]

2011 was when Barcelona were the most dominant, they got better and better after releasing more of these players with "pace and physicality".
After the final in 2011 there was perhaps a bit of stagnation, and a lot of turbulence also, but until Enrique, Neymar and Rakitic arrived, they were generally moving in the direction I wanted.
With these three, they mixed it up more and more, and lost more and more of that core that Pep built. I do consider the 2015 title to be a Pyrrhus victory, owing much more to Peps earlier work, and to that style, than was credited, but still moving away from it.
In the short term there is nothing easier and "better" than taking a team like that and bring some verticality and "decisiveness" to it, but in the long term it's bad. I've seen this on multiple levels.

I also don't at all agree with the distinction between league and cup. The difference lies almost only in variance, not at all in some psychological difference.
An isolated game is always decided to a large degree by chance. These "clutch" players are just the players that happened to score.
I hope everyone here can see there has been no player more clutch than Messi, the regular football viewer thinks the opposite, since the NT games is such a small sample.

The thing about lacking a "plan B" is also very annoying, a stupid thing people used to say when Barcelona lost, but how many times didn't they turn games around by sticking to their plan?
More than any flexible team I'm pretty certain.
No national team has been dominant since Spain, and they were dominant mostly because they had the core from the same club already.

To not be completely off topic in this thread I give you this little video I found: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRZcQyw7qrU

We peaked in 2011 sure, that's not in doubt. But we also were pretty uninspiring between 2012-2014 at times, we relied on Messi for ridiculous amounts of goals. Our plan A had definitely lost it's edge. Coincidentally that summer of 2014 was our last decent transfer window. 7 years ago, no wonder we are a shambles now.

 

[khaled_a_d]

Football evolve, and coach evolves with it.

Even Pep of 2009 isn't Pep of 2016 or 2021, if you just stick to your own old ideas the game will get past you. W

So even if we like 2011 team the most, it isn't realistic to want to copy it a decade later, we need to rebuild our own identity again. Pep didn't just take Crujif ideas of old and applied it, he evolved and made a better use and making of it.

Above all of that, the main elements of Pep team were the speed and pressing, both who are still essential today.
It wasn't just the rondos and triangles, it is how quick we executed them to punish team when needed.
The side possession passes was to control the tempo of the game, to be press resistant when teams try to apply pressure on you.

When teams parked the bus, it was an effective way to slow us down, in 2011 we were able to deal with them successfully as a team, as it was the last year the whole core of the team was still in its prime (with exception of Puyol who started to get injured that season). This was the only year we had prime Xavi/Iniesta/Busquets
Xavi has started decline the next season, something that people rarely document tbh. It was a slow but steady decline since that year.

Soon enough, the quick style that was there to break defenses are no more available, the pressing isn't as it once was and the side passes to resist pressure became the norm style of play.

The core ideas of Pep itself weren't here tbh, and those are the same ideas we needed to add to it.
Lucho came and added more directness to it, gave us more pragmatic approach in attack, brought the speed of the game and the energy back with him.
But when his cycle has ended, we were left with older core, who were again left with that distorted remanence of Pep's ideas, but older and less energy than ever.
We lose Neymar and we start getting all those stupid transfers, and the speed and energy of Pep's idea aren't even in the memory of most fans when discussing the football we used to play anymore.

I honestly still think the Lucho team is probably the most suitable team for modern football, and probably the only one you can somewhat replicate.
Liverpool has a very similar model with Klopp too.

 

[Bobo32]

That you need to change and evolve as a team is true, but not really because "football evolves"
A team (especially one that won everyhing) easily stop being as hungry etc
Also opponents get better at dealing with the most succesful style atm - this goes in cycles.
Pep was always aware of this, I think the Zlatan transfer was in part just to change the dynamics
But there was never any need for a change of direction for Barcelona, just some tweaks here and there.
Pep played a lot differently in Bayern and City, but the core has mostly stayed the same
Just as he often used players like Cuenca or Jeffren, he seems to find it fun to isolate a player like that in a strict role on the flank etc
He never just put every midfielder on and let them solve everything.
But the aim is to dominate the game by dominating the ball. And then of course to do something with it!
About the pressing being essential - YES!
But it goes hand in hand with how you play with the ball - what positions you are in when you lose it and how tired or prepared you are to press
Check some of Pedris and Griezmanns losses of possession against PSG (also Messis, but I don't want to criticize him too much)
It's impossible to press, and to dominate the ball when you play like that.

This thing about modern football being more physical was said exactly the same in 2004, Rijkaards Barcelona already stood out by playing Xavi, Iniesta, Deco, most often two but sometimes three at the same time
Pep then showed that claim was total bullshit, as someone else will do again soon.

 

[BBZ8800]

2009 Barca is like 2006 Barcelona only a level above. Similar style, a bit more possession, but also with individual flair, and power + athleticism from players like Eto'o, Henry, and Yaya Toure.

I have a huge problem with this part, as if Cruijffs, Rijkaards and Peps Barca are the same.

I would say this way:
50% is the same.
The core is the same: Dutch total football, possession football, attacking football, movement, pressing.

So, 50% are fixed and the same, and the other 50% are variables.

For example:
Cruijff
- had a false 9, but Rijkaard hadn't
- Cruijff played with 3 at the back often
- Cruijff played with a sort of sweeper playmaker in Koeman, unlike Rijkaard and Pep
- Cruijff said: you can't win only with nice guys, you need some aggression. This is why he bought a bad boy Stoichkov who was banned for life of playing football aged 19, but later they allowed him to play. Pep never wanted conflict and bad guys.

Rijkaard:
- he took Cruijff's ideas, but removed a false 9
- he also added an Italian touch and a lot more physique. Cruijff had a physically weak Pep as a pivot. Pep had a similar Busi as a pivot. Yet, Rijkaard who was the best defensive midfielder in a history = had pivots like Davids, Motta, Edmilson, Van Bommel, Marquez and Yaya. Can you see the pattern?
- further, Rijkaards team was physically the tallest and the strongest Barca ever. Against Mou's bullies in 2006 at Stamford bridge, he fielded: Ronnie 180, Etoo 181, Edmilson 186, Motta 187, Puyol 180-ish, Marquez 184, Oleguer 187. 7 out of 10 field players with 180 or taller.
Now check Pep's 2011 Barca: short guys: Messi, Villa, Pedro, Xavi, Iniesta and a weak Busi. How is that the same team built on the same principles?
- further, the same as Cruijff, Rijkaard wanted some hot blood in Etoo, Puyol, Davids, Van Bommel. Aggressive, bad guys.
What did Pep do? He shipped Etoo, Zlatan and Mandzu after 1 year and surrounded himself with technical, spineless choirboys.
- Rijkaard said in 2004: we bought Guily, a captain of Monaco, Edmilson a captain of Lyon, Marquez a captain of Mexico, Etoo a captain of Cameroon. We want winners, fighters, leaders, strong personalities in our team. And then you have Pep who turned to submissive technical choirboys.
- let's go further: Rijkaard had a true no9 in Etoo and Larsson, Pep preferred false 9 and he dislikes good old no9
- Rijkaard had more crosses, longballs, headers, corners, longshots
- Pep lowered everything and bet everything on possession and 1 type of attacks
- Rijkaard had a plan B with Larsson and crosses, Pep's plan B has always been = try a plan A for the 1000th time and hope that it will work
- Rijkaard knew how to play more cautious and defensive when we were leading, and he had iirc 60% of away KO CL wins in his era, while Pep's light team couldn't cope with away European matches and had like 20-ish % of away wins. Cruijjf, the same. His approach was abysmal in Europe with 16% of away wins.

Then you have Pep:
- who lowered height and strength of Rijkaards team and traded height for Iniesta/David Silva clones. When you watch Pep's teams, you always have an impression that you have 10 exactly the same players on the pitch
- also, Pep brought back false 9
- he stopped using corners and invented short corners
- he killed a no9
- stopped using long balls, crosses and headers
- got rid of bad boys and created an army of nice, technical soldiers who rarely argue or fight

Now, the thing is:
- when on prime, Pep's team is miles better than Rijkaards
- but, Peps tactics worked in Europe only with Xavi, Iniesta and Messi. Can you imagine more suitable midfielders ever for Barcas style? I cant.
- so, on prime, Peps style is the best.
But the problem is: its style can work in Europe only in perfect conditions with perfect players.
In that sense, Rijkaards and Luchos Barca were "mortal" Barcas, a type of team which was not perfect, yet worked awesome.

So, in short: NO, not all Barcas were the same.
They only had the similar core/roots.
But each of Barcas had their own tricks and variables.

And also: imo, we should stop chasing Pep's team from 2011.
Imo, it would be way easier to win today with Rijkaards or Luchos style.
Those teams were less perfect, but had a better physique, better defense and coped better in away matches, especially Rijkaard's Barca.

I have said a lot of times, Peps Barca is my least favorite version of Barca because he killed so many variables like height, strength, crosses, headers, corners, bad boys.
And due to a huge success of Pep, now millions of fans see Peps era as a true/classic Barca.

And this is why we have stupid ideas of Pedri-Puig midfield and similar.
Do you think that Rijkaard would play Pedri-Puig, lol? Hell no.
Lucho? No way.
Pep? He could...

But then again, Pep never managed to win a CL without Messi, Xaviniesta, so you need to raise some questions about how effective his style is when you don't have those 3 guys in your team.

 

[JerseyAddict]

I think @BBZ has good points here. But it takes ages to read it so they get lost in wall of text.

 

[serghei]

I have a huge problem with this part, as if Cruijffs, Rijkaards and Peps Barca are the same.

I would say this way:
50% is the same.
The core is the same: Dutch total football, possession football, attacking football, movement, pressing.

So, 50% are fixed and the same, and the other 50% are variables.

For example:
Cruijff
- had a false 9, but Rijkaard hadn't
- Cruijff played with 3 at the back often
- Cruijff played with a sort of sweeper playmaker in Koeman, unlike Rijkaard and Pep
- Cruijff said: you can't win only with nice guys, you need some aggression. This is why he bought a bad boy Stoichkov who was banned for life of playing football aged 19, but later they allowed him to play. Pep never wanted conflict and bad guys.

Rijkaard:
- he took Cruijff's ideas, but removed a false 9
- he also added an Italian touch and a lot more physique. Cruijff had a physically weak Pep as a pivot. Pep had a similar Busi as a pivot. Yet, Rijkaard who was the best defensive midfielder in a history = had pivots like Davids, Motta, Edmilson, Van Bommel, Marquez and Yaya. Can you see the pattern?
- further, Rijkaards team was physically the tallest and the strongest Barca ever. Against Mou's bullies in 2006 at Stamford bridge, he fielded: Ronnie 180, Etoo 181, Edmilson 186, Motta 187, Puyol 180-ish, Marquez 184, Oleguer 187. 7 out of 10 field players with 180 or taller.
Now check Pep's 2011 Barca: short guys: Messi, Villa, Pedro, Xavi, Iniesta and a weak Busi. How is that the same team built on the same principles?
- further, the same as Cruijff, Rijkaard wanted some hot blood in Etoo, Puyol, Davids, Van Bommel. Aggressive, bad guys.
What did Pep do? He shipped Etoo, Zlatan and Mandzu after 1 year and surrounded himself with technical, spineless choirboys.
- Rijkaard said in 2004: we bought Guily, a captain of Monaco, Edmilson a captain of Lyon, Marquez a captain of Mexico, Etoo a captain of Cameroon. We want winners, fighters, leaders, strong personalities in our team. And then you have Pep who turned to submissive technical choirboys.
- let's go further: Rijkaard had a true no9 in Etoo and Larsson, Pep preferred false 9 and he dislikes good old no9
- Rijkaard had more crosses, longballs, headers, corners, longshots
- Pep lowered everything and bet everything on possession and 1 type of attacks
- Rijkaard had a plan B with Larsson and crosses, Pep's plan B has always been = try a plan A for the 1000th time and hope that it will work
- Rijkaard knew how to play more cautious and defensive when we were leading, and he had iirc 60% of away KO CL wins in his era, while Pep's light team couldn't cope with away European matches and had like 20-ish % of away wins. Cruijjf, the same. His approach was abysmal in Europe with 16% of away wins.

Then you have Pep:
- who lowered height and strength of Rijkaards team and traded height for Iniesta/David Silva clones. When you watch Pep's teams, you always have an impression that you have 10 exactly the same players on the pitch
- also, Pep brought back false 9
- he stopped using corners and invented short corners
- he killed a no9
- stopped using long balls, crosses and headers
- got rid of bad boys and created an army of nice, technical soldiers who rarely argue or fight

Now, the thing is:
- when on prime, Pep's team is miles better than Rijkaards
- but, Peps tactics worked in Europe only with Xavi, Iniesta and Messi. Can you imagine more suitable midfielders ever for Barcas style? I cant.
- so, on prime, Peps style is the best.
But the problem is: its style can work in Europe only in perfect conditions with perfect players.
In that sense, Rijkaards and Luchos Barca were "mortal" Barcas, a type of team which was not perfect, yet worked awesome.

So, in short: NO, not all Barcas were the same.
They only had the similar core/roots.
But each of Barcas had their own tricks and variables.

And also: imo, we should stop chasing Pep's team from 2011.
Imo, it would be way easier to win today with Rijkaards or Luchos style.
Those teams were less perfect, but had a better physique, better defense and coped better in away matches, especially Rijkaard's Barca.

I have said a lot of times, Peps Barca is my least favorite version of Barca because he killed so many variables like height, strength, crosses, headers, corners, bad boys.
And due to a huge success of Pep, now millions of fans see Peps era as a true/classic Barca.

And this is why we have stupid ideas of Pedri-Puig midfield and similar.
Do you think that Rijkaard would play Pedri-Puig, lol? Hell no.
Lucho? No way.
Pep? He could...

But then again, Pep never managed to win a CL without Messi, Xaviniesta, so you need to raise some questions about how effective his style is when you don't have those 3 guys in your team.

Nothing is ever the same in the true sense of the word, as in identical, that's not what I'm saying. I have seen reruns with our games in this pandemic, full games from archives on my sports channel in Romania, Digisport. There are noticeable differences even between reiteration of Guardiola's Barcelona. You still see much more similarities between 2009 and 2011 Barca than differences. To make an example, all Barca versions I've seen are like the feline family in the animal world. Sure, the cat is not the same as a cheetah, not the same with a panther, not the same with a tiger. But if you strip them all down to the core, you will see the same instincts. What are we about as an institution and football club? We're about possession (more or less depending on manager and players available), dominating the opponent (almost always the priority), positional play (we attack more than we defend + counter, even against big teams), pressing, flair players. On top of that, we add different things. Even under Pep, we had 3 completely different no9s. Eto'o, Zlatan, and Messi. But you seem to disregard that.

The underlying philosophy is still recognizable under Rijkaard and Pep as well. Very few find more differences than similarities between these teams. I was a really avid Barca fan (watching all games) starting with 2004-2005. So, at the start of Rijkaard's tenure. For me, the transition from Rijkaard to Pep was seamless. I never got the impression I'm saying something new, or something extremely different. How many liked the 2006 double-winning team, but saw the sextuple 2009 side as bad to watch? Nearly no one I'd bet. It was almost as if we were perfecting our style. Improving our possession, improving our pressing, improving our technique all over the field. I agree that the team in 2011 was unique and can't be recreated, because it took our style to its purest form of expression, and this was only possible with stars lining up, and by that, I mean genius visionary manager + incredible all-time great legends + institutionalized style dating back decades of Cruyff total-football. We have the style in the club, but the quality of managers and players to coincide at that level..., let's just say it's a minuscule chance of seeing it again in our lifetimes.

Of course, Pep's Barca is true Barca, in fact it's the best version of it. That should be obvious. Why do you think we played like that with so many Barca B players? We played like that because the whole team had Barca DNA deeply ingrained already, from Guardiola, to Xavi, Iniesta, Messi, Puyol, Pique, Pedro, Busquets etc. Guardiola, the architect himself, was produced by the Barca system. That should be proof enough.

That type of exuberant football was always in our power to play post Cruyff's influence, ideologically speaking. We just needed the right men to implement it, and the right talent to sustain the implementation and conquer the world with it. We had both, and this is where the golden generation was created. From this juxtaposition of ideology, talent, boldness, and vision. 99.9% of the time you lack something. 0.1% of the time nearly everything fits together.

Your theory doesn't make sense. Explain to me how it is possible to win instantaneously with so many homegrown players if the style is not ingrained in the club beforehand? In Pep's first year we won 6/6 titles, and we only managed to do that, because Pep brought in a style that was already part of the club's identity for decades. So the transition is never needed, because it's all the tools are already there. The players already have been thought to play how you want them to.

 

[serghei]

Football evolve, and coach evolves with it.

Even Pep of 2009 isn't Pep of 2016 or 2021, if you just stick to your own old ideas the game will get past you. W

So even if we like 2011 team the most, it isn't realistic to want to copy it a decade later, we need to rebuild our own identity again. Pep didn't just take Crujif ideas of old and applied it, he evolved and made a better use and making of it.

Above all of that, the main elements of Pep team were the speed and pressing, both who are still essential today.
It wasn't just the rondos and triangles, it is how quick we executed them to punish team when needed.
The side possession passes was to control the tempo of the game, to be press resistant when teams try to apply pressure on you.

When teams parked the bus, it was an effective way to slow us down, in 2011 we were able to deal with them successfully as a team, as it was the last year the whole core of the team was still in its prime (with exception of Puyol who started to get injured that season). This was the only year we had prime Xavi/Iniesta/Busquets
Xavi has started decline the next season, something that people rarely document tbh. It was a slow but steady decline since that year.

Soon enough, the quick style that was there to break defenses are no more available, the pressing isn't as it once was and the side passes to resist pressure became the norm style of play.

The core ideas of Pep itself weren't here tbh, and those are the same ideas we needed to add to it.
Lucho came and added more directness to it, gave us more pragmatic approach in attack, brought the speed of the game and the energy back with him.
But when his cycle has ended, we were left with older core, who were again left with that distorted remanence of Pep's ideas, but older and less energy than ever.
We lose Neymar and we start getting all those stupid transfers, and the speed and energy of Pep's idea aren't even in the memory of most fans when discussing the football we used to play anymore.

I honestly still think the Lucho team is probably the most suitable team for modern football, and probably the only one you can somewhat replicate.
Liverpool has a very similar model with Klopp too.

Agree with most here.

Except let's be real here. Lucho's team and style? His style was having MSN up front. That kind of luxury will not be repeated anytime soon, and certainly not by Barca. That's like having Mbappe, Haaland, and Salah upfront. Only better .

If you have that today, you are dead on to win the CL without needing much "vision".

 

[JohnN]

We are so far away, player level wise, from all those past teams that none of those systems would be applicable. But the truth is Pep's is the least applicable because it requires truly great players to work. That's why his was a best of all time team and the others were "just" great teams.

 

[serghei]

We are so far away, player level wise, from all those past teams that none of those systems would be applicable. But the truth is Pep's is the least applicable because it requires truly great players to work. That's why his was a best of all time team and the others were "just" great teams.

Except if City somehow stop fucking up in CL. Then Pep's style becomes great in CL again. Pep's style is the hardest to implement, not because of lack of players, but because of lack of Pep .

 

[JohnN]

Except if City somehow stop fucking up in CL. Then Pep's style becomes great in CL again.

I don't ever say it's bad in any way. I agree that it's not a system we can try to follow at this stage. We need years of rebuilding and a crazy amount of luck to ever go back there. And that shouldn't be our main goal. Building a competitive team, without the illusion of dominance is our best shot.

 

[Bobo32]

Just some comments on BBZs latest post:

-Pep has created teams that have been favourites to win CL without these players. He has not yet won it again, but this will probably come, maybe soon.

-Rijkaards team came from buying these players, pretty much the most hyped players in europe, at the same time. First Ronaldinho, Marquez, Gio and others in 2003, and then in 2004 Deco, Giuly, Eto'o and some others like Edmilson, Larsson, Belletti... It was crazy watching them get player after player. It takes skill to bring them together, but can Barcelona count on getting these kinds of transfers in again? Some hope Laporta can do it once more...

-Pep brought in Mascherano and Zlatan, not the nicest players. Adriano and Sanchez aren't really like Iniesta either...

-I am not sure of Puig-Pedri on the midfield, but I am sure of Puig. I doubt Pep would trust Pedri as an interior. If they brought Thiago as company to Puig I think it'd be great.

To serghei: I agree that the teams of Rijkaard and Pep were of largely the same style, but it was a great revelation seeing Peps team immediately. Everything fell into place. I think the possibilty for the same to happen is there right now, with Xavi. Not to win everything immediately maybe, but getting a better team than now by going back to the roots and have a heavy focus on identity. Right now there are 11 players playing different games when Barcelona play.

Question: you who followed Barcelona in 2007 What did you think about Busquets and Pedro at the time? (before their debuts)

 

[khaled_a_d]

Agree with most here.

Except let's be real here. Lucho's team and style? His style was having MSN up front. That kind of luxury will not be repeated anytime soon, and certainly not by Barca. That's like having Mbappe, Haaland, and Salah upfront. Only better .

If you have that today, you are dead on to win the CL without needing much "vision".

Lucho had clear ideas of how to manage the team.
His work is really underrated because of MSN, which is shame considering we are seeing now how much difficult it is to get the best of the stars you buy.
People foe example give Klopp too much credit for Salah development, but don't give Lucho anything for how much he helped Neymar